Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-68051 is a high-severity Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 28th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2025-68051 is an Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability (CWE-639) in the Shiprocket WordPress plugin. The flaw allows exploitation of incorrectly configured access control security levels and affects all versions from n/a through 2.0.8.
Remote unauthenticated attackers can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity and no user interaction, as indicated by its CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N). Successful exploitation enables high-impact confidentiality breaches, such as unauthorized access to sensitive data, without impacting integrity or availability.
The Patchstack advisory describes this as an insecure direct object references (IDOR) vulnerability in the Shiprocket WordPress plugin up to version 2.0.8. Security practitioners should review the advisory at https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/shiprocket/vulnerability/wordpress-shiprocket-plugin-2-0-8-insecure-direct-object-references-idor-vulnerability?_s_id=cve for detailed mitigation steps.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-208076
Vulnerability Data
Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability in Shiprocket Shiprocket shiprocket allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Shiprocket: from n/a through <= 2.0.8.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Enforcing approved authorizations on every access request structurally stops a user-controlled key from reaching another user's data.
Requiring explicit access-control decisions on each request blocks unauthorized key-driven access.
Least-privilege restrictions limit the scope of data reachable even if a key check is bypassed.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Enforcing authorization policy and least privilege directly blocks user-controlled key tampering that bypasses access checks.
Logical access controls prevent unauthorized data access that results from missing authorization checks on object references.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
A.8.3 mandates that access to information be restricted based on user identity and permissions, directly addressing the missing authorization check that defines CWE-639; when applied, it removes the vulnerability by requiring that such checks be implemented.
A.5.15 directly requires defining and implementing access control rules (including authorization, need-to-know, role-based restrictions, formal requests, and consistency with classification) that stop one user from reaching another's data via a tampered key; the bounded remainder is dynamic or application-specific authorization logic (cross-referenced to 8.26) that may still allow bypass if those downstream rules are flawed.
Security testing can detect missing authorization checks but does not prevent the weakness in production.
Managing access rights includes ensuring users can only access their own records and not bypass authorization by altering identifiers.
Secure coding practices reduce the likelihood of missing authorization checks but do not guarantee their presence at runtime.